From: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>
To: Bill Studenmund <wrstuden@netbsd.org>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>
Subject: Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 09:20:46 +0900
Message-ID: <3C573C5E.F01B48C2@tpf.co.jp> (raw)
References: <Pine.NEB.4.33.0201290939350.24201-100000@vespasia.home-net.internetconnect.net>
Bill Studenmund wrote:
>
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2002, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
>
> > What I can find in SQL99 is SQL-path.
> > Does *the path*(i.e search path) mean SQL-path ?
> > They don't seem the same to me.
>
> While we may have not been using the terminology of the spec, I think we
> have been talking about schema paths from SQL99.
>
> One difference between our discussions and SQL99 I've noticed is that
> we've spoken of having the path find functions (and operators and
> aggregates), types, _and_tables_.
My understanding is the same.
Tom, Peter is it right ?
> SQL99 doesn't have tables in there
> AFAICT, but I think it makes sense.
It seems to make sense but they are different and
our *path* is never an extension of SQL-path.
Where are the difference or the relevance referred
to in this thread ?
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: Inoue@tpf.co.jp, wrstuden@netbsd.org, peter_e@gmx.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
Subject: Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects
In-Reply-To: <3C573C5E.F01B48C2@tpf.co.jp>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox